We performed a comparison between Dynatrace and OpenText SiteScope based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."RCA (Root Cause Analysis) and the PurePaths, where you can see the stack trace, are helpful in finding problems."
"A monitoring system that can show us code level details."
"PurePaths. The ability to see the transaction flow of the web request. It's valuable because our developers, when we have an issue, they can drill down to see exactly where in the application, the call in the application; where the high response time is, or where something is wrong."
"One thing it helped with: We should never get traffic from outside the U.S. and we were getting traffic from Europe, and that was a problem. We found out what caused it. Dynatrace helped us find that information out. We wouldn't have found it otherwise."
"Automation and anomaly detection has helped reduce MTTR and MTBF."
"I like the drill-down feature, that it can drill down to the code level to point to where the problems are. It's also helpful for the developers to identify what exactly happens, rather than the operation team having to do so. It works well for the developers to fix issues."
"Improved visibility on performance and application issues."
"We are able to fix issues rather quickly, by identifying then fixing them. Therefore, the efficiency of the organization has improved. We are spending less time fixing issues."
"The tool has capabilities other than managing web-based applications, like URL Monitor and EPI Script. It is also easy to use the tool."
"The stability of the Micro Focus Voltage SiteScope is good."
"Our experiences with Micro Focus SiteScope have been mostly positive as we can easily work with multiple monitors and different types of monitors pretty quickly. There are a lot of out-of-the-box solutions for us through Micro Focus SiteScope, so we don't have to do that much custom coding for the vast majority of requests that we get for monitoring. There are some limitations that we've run into and some problems every once in a while, but they've been relatively minor."
"Infrastructure monitoring is the most valuable feature."
"The product's ability to monitor systems and applications and send alerts and create support tickets are the most valuable features of the product."
"The most valuable feature of SiteScope is its infrastructure monitoring."
"The URL monitoring is excellent."
"The most valuable feature of OpenText SiteScope is that it is easy to manage and user-friendly."
"The dashboarding in Dynatrace is not very good. We have used other monitoring tools like AppDynamics. We are also using AppDynamics for some of our products. If I compare Dynatrace with those monitoring tools, the dashboarding is not as good. If I have to create a dashboard it takes me time, the experience is not that good."
"If you have many distributed servers, you will need to install or migrate every agent. This can be a problem if you have too many, and it takes time."
"If we can gain more insight into older applications, using not-so-recent technologies, then it would be a plus."
"When integrating this solution with any third party applications, there is an additional cost to pay. This can make the solution very costly to use."
"When compared with other tools, the experience needs improvement. I would like them to build out the interactions and make them friendlier."
"In AppMon, the performance could be improved. That is the one thing I am most interested in."
"The solution is a bit pricey."
"I think they're working on even more integration from external third party input, but that is ongoing. So the faster it's there the better. Clock monitoring is one of these areas where improvements can be made."
"They have not kept up with browser security requirements or advances in GUIs, they switched to a corruptible database architecture instead of text config files."
"They need to offer better technical support, which, right now, is not helpful or responsive."
"The graphs and dashboard in the solution are areas that need improvement."
"It could be more reliable using a database repository instead of a log repository."
"Micro Focus Voltage SiteScope could improve by adding more features, such as cloud, APM, and DevOps monitoring."
"In terms of issues with Micro Focus SiteScope, some that we've run into were unintended, for example, extra executions of monitors and some false alerts when there were problems connecting to endpoints or there were issues with the application that sometimes resulted in false positives. We had a few issues with the way time zones were configured when the system time differed from the time indicated during the monitoring, but those were just little things that weren't too bad. As far as the limitations of Micro Focus SiteScope, the types of scripting files that can be executed are rather limited unless you go to some third-party plugins. These are the areas for improvement in the solution."
"The tool needs to support new technologies like Kubernetes. It also needs to improve scalability."
"You can use OpenText SiteScope for small or middle environments. But if you want to monitor a large environment, it is not scalable. If you can monitor a large environment with OpenText SiteScope, it can be a valuable product."
Dynatrace is ranked 2nd in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 340 reviews while OpenText SiteScope is ranked 28th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 24 reviews. Dynatrace is rated 8.8, while OpenText SiteScope is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Dynatrace writes "AI identifies all the components of a response-time issue or failure, hugely benefiting our triage efforts". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenText SiteScope writes "Doesn't require much custom coding and can run on different platforms, but the types of scripting files you can execute on it are limited". Dynatrace is most compared with Datadog, New Relic, AppDynamics, Splunk Enterprise Security and Azure Monitor, whereas OpenText SiteScope is most compared with SCOM, AppDynamics, Prometheus, BMC TrueSight Operations Management and Splunk Enterprise Security. See our Dynatrace vs. OpenText SiteScope report.
See our list of best Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability vendors.
We monitor all Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
Hello,
Just to add to some of the comments regarding dynaTrace. So far those are all correct. I just want to add, dynaTrace also has the capability to perform agent-less monitoring as well. Some of the things we used SiteScope for (url monitoring, log file monitoring, etc.) we were able to transition into dynaTrace allowing us to get rid of SiteScope altogether due to it's ability to develop custom plugins which allows you to really do a lot of extra things that aren't available out of the box which I take advantage of everyday.
Thank you very much to one and all.
Sorry, don't really have a lot of exposure to either of the products.
Mark,
Sitescope is a bottum up (technical) monitoring tool. It is agentless. Advantages: 1) with a user account/password you can monitor your systems so a fast realization of technical monitoring. 2) you don't have to install an agent (prevent the "not invented by us syndrome" most admins have 3) it provides out of the box monitors for different technologies. You don't have to develop scripts first to enable monitoring 4) it's a perfect tool for setting up performance tests fast, it integrates in Loadrunner (this means that doing analysis is not delayed by importing technical metrics from other parties) 5) you can work independant from other silo's during performance tests. 6) history of metrics. Disadvantage 1) If there is no connectivity between Sitescope and the monitoring object there is no data collected 2) it samples, just like any other monitoring tool and so you miss the reason of time outs.
dynaTrace: is a 3 rd gen diagnostic tool. It's approach is the end user experience (top down approach). So it measures each individual session of each individual end user across the chain and measures where the response times is consumed. From that point you can drill down into the application layer where Sitescope is not able to do any monitoring at all. Sitescope only reaches the OS and Middleware layers, not the application layer. By drill down I mean: into the application code. You know exactly which application code is due to latency, which database calls are executed (SQL query) how many times and how that is related to the overall response time. Since version 5.5 you could also hook up technical metrics like the Windows Resource Counters, Websphere PMI metrics etc. So there is some overlap with Sitescope. dynaTRace is used to deploy across your DTAP and provides one reference point: the end user. There is no fingerpointing/blame game anymore: it gives you 100% grip and control, also in (synmchronous) messaging environments like Tibco. Besides the diagnostic functionality it embodies the ultimate monitoring maturity stack (BAM, Passive Monitoring, Active Monitoring, Technical Monitoring, Logfile monitoring). Minimal instrumenting, it doesn't sample in contradiction to AppDynamics. Besides Java and .NET, an ADK is available to build a custom Agent. Also a z/OS mainframe agent is available. Since version 6.0 (latest version) you can also import Wireshark measurements. dynaTrace hooksup with Gomeze SaaS (Active Monitoring outside customer premises) and DC RUM (Passive monitioring on customer premises infra)
With dynaTrace you save a lot of money regarding the required test cycles to find the root cause. With Sitescope the risk is bigger
It depents on what you customer's demand is: 1) Do you want to monitor only? 2) Do you want to monitor and solve the problem? 3) Is it part of Continuous Delivery?
If 1) there are other alternatives available (Open Source Graphite)
If 2+3 ) dynaTrace
Hi,
SiteScope is an agentless Infrastructure monitoring tool. It has a wide range of monitoring capabilities including Server,DB’s,Middleware,Network and application’s as well. Its very easy to deploy & configure.
Dynatrace is more application level monitoring. Its an agent based solution for java & Net applications. Its able to monitor transactions at thread level with deep drill down capabilities.
The solutioning will be based on the monitoring requirements, scope, cost & scalability.
Thanks,
Raj
The solutions have different purposes. I think it's better to summary both of them.
The HP SiteScope is a tool to monitor infrastructure components without agents. It monitors availability and some performance metrics of infrastructure elements. The metrics can be visualized by service model, so you can see which components are being affected.
dynaTrace monitors the application performance through agents. Applications developed by Java, .NET and PHP and also mobile applications are instrumented by the agents and monitored automatically. The monitoring covers 100% (all) transactions, providing traceability and point the problem. dynaTrace accelerates the troubleshooting, monitors end user experience, increase the collaboration between teams (dev, QA, prod, architectures), monitors business transaction effetivelly and also monitors infrastructure elements.
Regards,
Monica